Allen v. Allen et al

Filing 54

ORDER directing Plaintiff to advise the court whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file responses to Defendants' 48 Motions for summary judgment by July 7, 2015. Plaintiff is further advised that if he fails to respond, Plaintiff's claims will be recommended for dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute. Signed by Magistrate Judge Shiva V Hodges on 6/23/2015. (mwal)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Shay Lamont Allen,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Janet Singleton, Head Nurse; Jeffrey
Lucas, Correctional Officer; and Maj
Allen,
Defendants.
________________________________
Jeffrey Lucas, Correctional Officer; Maj
Allen,
Third-Party Plaintiffs,
vs.
Southern Health Partners, Inc., and
ABL Management, Inc.,
Third-Party Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A No.: 1:14-4126-JMC-SVH

ORDER

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brought this action alleging
violations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Defendants filed
motions for summary judgment against Plaintiff on May 5, 2015. [ECF Nos. 46, 48]. As
Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the court entered an order pursuant to Roseboro v.
Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), on May 6, 2015, advising him of the importance
of the motions for summary judgment and of the need for him to file adequate responses.

1

[ECF No. 50]. Plaintiff was specifically advised that if he failed to respond adequately,
Defendants’ motions may be granted.
Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the court’s
Roseboro order, Plaintiff has failed to respond Defendants’ motions. As such, it appears
to the court that he does not oppose the motions and wishes to abandon this action. Based
on the foregoing, Plaintiff is directed to advise the court whether he wishes to continue
with this case and to file responses to Defendants’ motions for summary judgment by
July 7, 2015. Plaintiff is further advised that if he fails to respond, Plaintiff’s claims will
be recommended for dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Davis v.
Williams, 588 F.2d 69, 70 (4th Cir. 1978); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
IT IS SO ORDERED.

June 23, 2015
Columbia, South Carolina

Shiva V. Hodges
United States Magistrate Judge

2